logoalt Hacker News

brandonagr2yesterday at 7:35 PM4 repliesview on HN

Which part of "attack enemies" implies they were targeting innocent people?


Replies

probably_wrongyesterday at 8:09 PM

Some searching led me to this report from an NGO called "AirWars" [1] which, in connection with The Guardian, reports that "at least 22,679, and potentially as many as 48,308 civilians, have been likely killed by US strikes".

You can't bomb an apartment without also hitting the neighbors. And while we know the US has the the technology to hit a car driver without (physically) hurting the passenger, we also know that this is not the type of technology deployed regularly.

I don't think a drone operator would be naive enough to believe that they are killing exclusively military targets and no one else.

[1] https://airwars.org/tens-of-thousands-of-civilians-likely-ki...

show 2 replies
netsharcyesterday at 7:47 PM

Obama's department of defense classified every male between 16-65 hit by drone attacks as enemy combatant until proven otherwise...

So the war crimes are bipartisan.

And I write this as someone who likes Obama.

show 2 replies
hiddencostyesterday at 11:45 PM

US military standard for "did we kill civilians" with drone attacks is "do these appear to be combat aged males, based on satellite photos".

It's monstrous.

isryesterday at 11:53 PM

Let's see. They were part of the US military, right? In just this war alone, they started by triple tapping an ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, murdering nearly 200 little children.

And on the same day, they attacked a SPORTS STADIUM, completely vapourising a women's volleyball team who were in the midst of a game.

And that was just ... DAY ONE.

By now, we should be asking - if you're a member of the US military on active duty in an active war - prove that YOU DIDN'T kill a child, mother, handicapped person in a wheelchair, or a grandpa.

Truth hurts, doesn't it?